A Contrastive Study Of Native English Teachers' And Chinese English Majors' Perceptions Of Corrective Feedback In Oral English Class

This study was intended to investigate native English teachers'and Chinese English majors'perceptions of the corrective feedback in oral English class and to analyze the underlying factors responsible for the similarities and differences in their perceptions between the two sides. The study employed a mixed design– a quantitative design and a qualitative design. The former included two questionnaires and the latter, two interviews.The research questions to be addressed in the study are as follows:1) What are the native English teachers'and Chinese English majors'perceptions of the role of error correction in oral English class?2) In what ways are their perceptions similar to or different from each other?3) What are the underlying factors responsible for such similarities and differences?In the quantitative section, 30 native English teachers (NETs) completed the questionnaire designed for teachers while 209 grade-two Chinese English majors (CEMs) completed the questionnaire for students. In the qualitative section, four NETs and six CEMs were interviewed. The results from the quantitative part addressed the first two questions and those from the qualitative part, the third question.Some major findings are as follows: 1) NETs'and CEMs'perceptions of corrective feedback are similar to each other in their attitudes towards: i) error and error correction in the classroom setting; ii) how errors should be corrected and iii) when errors should be corrected (except discourse errors).Their perceptions differ significantly in the following aspects: i) whether errors should be selectively corrected; ii) which errors should be corrected, and iii) who should correct errors.2) There are various factors responsible for the similarities in their perceptions of corrective feedback. First, both sides are aware of the necessity and importance of corrective feedback in the Chinese context. Second, both sides understand that good timing of error correction in communicative teaching approach facilitates English learners'accuracy as well as fluency. Third, the two sides now have a better knowledge of and better cooperation with each other because of the improved cross-cultural communication in recent years.3) There are also various factors responsible for the differences in their perceptions of corrective feedback. First, discrepancies exist between teachers'and students'relevant beliefs. Second, there are cultural differences between the two sides. For example, teachers from western culture sometimes prefer to encourage students to use the language to communicate rather than keep correcting minor errors; by contrast, people from Chinese culture maintain that the stricter a teacher is with his students the better it is for the students. Third, NETs'lack of teaching experience in China and CEMs'impractical expectations of NE teachers also account for different perceptions of CF between the two sides.The results of the present study also have strong pedagogical implications. First, a sound balance needs to be struck between encouragement and error correction in oral English class. Second, NE teachers are important in helping students notice their errors and aiding them to self-correct. Third, CEMs need to be more aware of NE teachers'implicit way of error correction. Finally, an EFL learner should get sufficient comprehensible input in order to facilitate better cross-cultural understanding.Limitations of the present study are as follows. First, due to time restriction, the study was not fully developed. Besides, the interviewees, both students and teachers, were chosen for convenience, so it might not ensure that the interviewees could represent the whole population, though subjects were chosen from four universities.